Frame-based argumentation for group decision task generation and identification

One of the most important stages of group decision-making is the generation and identification of decision tasks. In this paper, we define a decision task with five elements: decision makers, decision executors, decision objectives, decision problems and decision constrains. Based on this distinction, we present a conceptual model for generation and identification of group decision tasks in an organization. In addition, we describe a prototype of a group argumentation support system (GASS) that applies frame-based information structure in electronic brainstorming (EBS) and argumentation to support group decision task generation and identification. Using four group performance indicators, the prototype was evaluated in a lab experiment to determine its effectiveness and efficiency.

[1]  M. O. Locks,et al.  Note---The Logic of Policy as Argument , 1985 .

[2]  Hart.  Preventing Groupthink Revisited: Evaluating and Reforming Groups in Government. , 1998, Organizational behavior and human decision processes.

[3]  Dimitris Papadias,et al.  A Computational Approach for Argumentative Discourse in Multi-Agent Decision Making Environments , 1998, AI Commun..

[4]  Nikos I. Karacapilidis,et al.  The Zeno argumentation framework , 1997, ICAIL '97.

[5]  Robert D. McPhee,et al.  Group decision‐making as a structurational process , 1985 .

[6]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Electronic meeting systems , 1991, CACM.

[7]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  Lessons from a Dozen Years of Group Support Systems Research: A Discussion of Lab and Field Findings , 1996, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[8]  François Bodart,et al.  ARBAS: A Formal Language to Support Argumentation in Network-Based Organizations , 1997, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[9]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Information Exchange and Use in Group Decision Making: You Can Lead a Group to Information, but You Can't Make It Think , 1996, MIS Q..

[10]  P. Kirschner,et al.  External representation of argumentation in CSCL and the management of cognitive load , 2002 .

[11]  Gerardine DeSanctis,et al.  A foundation for the study of group decision support systems , 1987 .

[12]  Masoud Saeedi,et al.  Incorporating rhetorical and plausible reasoning in a system for simulating argumentation , 1999, Knowl. Based Syst..

[13]  Alan R. Dennis,et al.  Stimulating Thinking: Cultivating Better Decisions with Groupware Through Categorization , 2000, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[14]  Andrew Ravenscroft,et al.  Designing argumentation for conceptual development , 2000, Comput. Educ..

[15]  Dorien J. DeTombe.  Complex Societal Problems in Operational Research , 2002, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[16]  Ilze Zigurs,et al.  A Theory of Task/Technology Fit and Group Support Systems Effectiveness , 1998, MIS Q..

[17]  Simon S. K. Lam,et al.  The Effects of Group Decision Support Systems and Task Structures on Group Communication and Decision Quality , 1997, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[18]  S. Robbins.  Essentials of Organizational Behavior , 1984 .

[19]  Gary W. Dickson,et al.  Exploring Modes of Facilitative Support for GDSS Technology , 1993, MIS Q..

[20]  Andrew B. Whinston,et al.  Collaborative Decision Making: A Connectionist Paradigm for Dialectical Support , 2001, Inf. Syst. Res..

[21]  Jay F. Nunamaker,et al.  An Examination of the Impact of Stimuli Type and GSS Structure on Creativity: Brainstorming Versus Non-Brainstorming Techniques in a GSS Environment , 2002, J. Manag. Inf. Syst..

[22]  Steven Orla Kimbrough,et al.  On hypermedia-based argumentation decision support systems , 1993, [1993] Proceedings of the Twenty-sixth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences.

[23]  Rustam M. Vahidov,et al.  Incorporating critique and argumentation in DSS , 1999, Decis. Support Syst..

[24]  John A. A. Sillince,et al.  Argumentation and contract models for strategic organization support systems , 1996, Decis. Support Syst..

[25]  Masoud Saeedi,et al.  Issues of feasibility, coherence, and robustness in a premise-to-claim model of argumentation: Results from four experiments , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[26]  Masoud Saeedi,et al.  Computer-mediated communication: problems and potentials of argumentation support systems , 1999, Decis. Support Syst..

[27]  Dimitris Papadias,et al.  Collaborative environmental planning with GeoMed , 1997 .

[28]  Simon M. Kaplan,et al.  Supporting collaborative processes with Conversation Builder , 1992, Comput. Commun..

[29]  Nikos Karacapilidis,et al.  Integrating new information and communication technologies in a group decision support system , 2000 .

[30]  Andrew B. Whinston,et al.  Claims, Arguments, and Decisions: Formalisms for Representation, Gaming, and Coordination , 1994, Inf. Syst. Res..

[31]  Arthur B. Markman,et al.  Knowledge Representation , 1998 .

[32]  J. McGrath.  Groups: Interaction and Performance , 1984 .

[33]  D. Campbell.  Task Complexity: A Review and Analysis , 1988 .

[34]  Robert P. Bostrom,et al.  Meeting facilitation: process versus content interventions , 1999 .

[35]  Ian I. Mitroff,et al.  Policy as Argument-A Logic for Ill-Structured Decision Problems , 1982 .

[36]  Nikos I. Karacapilidis,et al.  Computer-supported collaborative argumentation and fuzzy similarity measures in multiple criteria decision making , 2000, Comput. Oper. Res..